We have covered more than a thousand miles visiting Oregon’s four corners to talk to folks about the goals of Meyer’s Healthy Environment portfolio and the new funding opportunities for 2016.
One of the more common questions we’ve been hearing in regards to the Healthy Environment portfolio has been: How much should I apply for?
That is a great question without a simple answer. We can say that Meyer is rarely the first funder or only funder of a project. We look for projects that leverage other resources and for projects that have the support and involvement of the community.
Each of Meyer’s portfolios offer guidelines for the 2016 funding opportunities and provide ranges for the types of requests that we’ll be accepting.
The Healthy Environment portfolio’s funding ranges can be found here. In general, we expect only to make a few grants at the high end of the range and expect that some of our grants will be one-year awards while others will be multi-year projects. We predict that awards granted at the top of the range will tend to be bigger, more complex and multi-year projects that may involve several organizations working collaboratively. In addition to project length and size, we will also look at the grant request relative to the full budget for the project and the organization, and how much of that organization’s budget Meyer would support if it has multiple grants.
No single factor determines the answer. So, consider these points and try to craft a request that makes sense within the ranges.
See more answers to questions we’ve heard on our FAQs page. And, finally, reach out to the portfolio staff or questions [at] mmt.org (questions[at]mmt[dot]org) if you want to talk through a grant request size.
It’s important to acknowledge that on this 189th day of 2016. To date this year, more than 500 people have been killed by police officers in this country. The exact figure could be 509. That’s how many such deaths The Washington Post has tracked in 2016. Or it might be 561, which is the total The Guardian reports killed at the hands of police in 2016.
America’s population totals around 322 million people — 62 percent are white and about 12 percent are black. Depending on which source you prefer, 123 or 136 of those killed this year were black, not the 67 people who would be killed if police killings were proportionally equal to the number of Americans who are black. That amounts to an African-American being killed by police every 33 hours. Since Michael Brown’s death in Ferguson, Mo., in 2014, roughly 400 black people have been killed by police, many of them unarmed, a number of them women.
I’m doing the math in order to try to make sense of the senseless. We can’t be naive about the disproportionate rates of police violence and killings in communities that are perpetually subjected to bias. Racism and racial profiling are real and do irreparable harm to black and brown people.
Last year, I came across a quote in a story on Huffington Post that really struck me: “Race is a trigger for police brutality.” The speaker was Jack Glaser, an associate professor at the Goldman School of Public Policy at University of California-Berkeley. His point: Racial bias affects all officers, no matter their own skin color.
Within a 44-hour period between Tuesday morning and Wednesday night, two black men were shot and killed during encounters with police: Alton Sterling, a 37-year-old father of five from Baton Rouge, La., who was fatally shot while selling CDs outside a convenience store, and Philando Castile, a 32-year-old school cafeteria supervisor, who was mortally wounded during a traffic stop in Falcon Heights, Minn.
Widely circulated cell phone videos captured Sterling’s death. Castile’s passenger live streamed the aftermath of his shooting on Facebook. As of Thursday morning, that video alone had been viewed more than 3.5 million times.
You can not unsee or avoid the pain and the anguish in those videos.
I belong to a movement of people who believe black lives matter. We want the long and growing list of mothers and fathers, sisters, brothers and children who die during encounters with police to end with the names Alton Sterling and Philando Castile. We want the lives of Black Americans to be valued. We want an end to the killing. As Jesse Williams, the actor who was recently awarded Black Entertainment Television’s Humanitarian Award, said: “What we’ve been doing is looking at the data and we know that police somehow manage to de-escalate, disarm and not kill white people everyday.” We want to see police de-escalate, disarm and not kill black people.
Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton responded to Castile’s death with these words: “Would this have happened if the driver and the passengers had been white? I don’t think it would have. This kind of racism exists and it’s incumbent on all of us to vow that we’re going to do whatever we can to see that it doesn’t happen.”
Here’s something you can do if you’re exhausted by the litany of police deaths: Go see Hands Up. It is a series of monologues that lays bare African-American experiences of racial profiling by police. Hands Up is playing this Friday and Saturday at the Center for Self Enhancement Auditorium at SEI, 3920 N. Kerby Avenue in Portland. The Collins Foundation and Meyer Memorial Trust partnered to sponsor a nine-show revival of this important production by the August Wilson Red Door Project to give Oregonians more chances to stand in the shoes of our black friends, relatives, neighbors and co-workers. It is an unforgettable experience.
The shows are free, the words are healing, the post-performance discussions are true and transformative. What could be more urgent and timely? Get your tickets here.
I was once a grantwriter and nothing brought on the dread quicker than to read that a foundation was looking to fund proposals and organizations that “aligned” with its mission, goals and strategies.
That term, “alignment,” sounded vague and subjective to me. What did that even mean? Now that I’m on this side of the funding equation, I see how, in designing the application process, Meyer’s intention has been not only to determine which organizations and proposals share our priorities, but also to help organizations define their work and think deeply about what they do, how they do it and whom they benefit. So let me help demystify what Meyer means when we speak of alignment. I hope you find the following tips helpful:
— If you received a Meyer grant in the past, take note of how we have refocused
Through our recent redesign, it became clear to us that we wanted to deepen our work with organizations that are working to address the root causes of oppression, structural biases and the systemic inequities that exist within our state. (Read our Equity Statement here.)We know that organizations all over Oregon are protecting our environment, supporting communities and working for affordable and safe housing; we want to go a step further and partner with organizations that not only serve historically marginalized populations, but also value their perspective. We are specifically looking to partner with folks who are already engaged in this work and those who are committed to increasing their impact.
— Check out what we fund and do not fund
There’s a big difference between fit (whether a project does the type of work or proposes to achieve the kinds of results we want to fund) and eligibility. Regardless of how strong a proposal might be, it must meet our eligibility requirements and align with what we seek to support. Our eligibility information can be found here.
— Read about our Goals, Strategies and Desired Outcomes
When you fill out your inquiry application, Meyer asks you to choose one goal with which you feel your work most aligns. Deciding which goal to choose is an important part of the application process, especially if you already have a project in mind or have started a program that doesn’t neatly fit under just one goal. If you feel your work might align with two or more goals within a portfolio, or with goals in different portfolios, choose the goal/portfolio that you think most aligns with your work (e.g., 51% or more of the intended activities can be tied to the goal area). When we review inquiry applications, we will look for good matches between your proposed project and our specific goals.
Some organizations will find an easy fit with our goals and outcomes. Others will find it more difficult. If that’s the case, the next section will hopefully provide more guidance. And if you have questions, we’re happy to help you think this through, just send us an email or give us a call at 503.228.5512.
— Visit our Funding Opportunities page
Once you’ve clarified your eligibility, look at the individual portfolio pages for more information about current funding opportunities. Building Community’s page is here and Healthy Environment’s is here (the Housing Opportunities’ deadline has already passed and Equitable Education will announce its funding opportunities in early 2017). Through Meyer’s portfolio pages, you will find the total available funds for each portfolio, types of grants and dollar ranges for each and what the application process looks like, including a preview of the inquiry questions, deadlines and links to create or update your account in GrantIS (Meyer’s online grant application system).
— Determine if Meyer and your organization share goals and desired outcomes
To help you think about whether your project is a good fit, take our goals and turn them into questions. For example:
Building Community Goal 1: Invest in strategies that dismantle inequities and create new opportunities to advance equity → Does my work/project dismantle inequities and create new opportunities to advance equity?Good question, but not necessarily easy to answer. So look at the intended outcomes under that goal and do the same: put them in question form and see if your organization’s work fits one or more of them. For example:
Building Community Outcome 3. Policy and Systems Change: Increase equitable opportunities and reduce disparities through changes in public policy, systems and institutional practices → How does my project increase (or is looking to increase) equitable opportunities and reduce disparities through changes in public policy, systems and institutional practices?
If you’ve read through the goals and outcomes, have asked yourself those questions and still can’t see alignment between your project and our funding priorities, talk with us. We might be able to help you think about whether there is a fit, or share honestly if we do not see compatibility at this time.
— Decide the type of support you’ll need
What type of support do you need? Is the work underway or just starting out? Do you need an infusion of funds to build your organization’s capacity or are you looking to construct a new building? Click here for the types of support the Healthy Environment portfolio offers and click here for Building Community’s funding types.
— Ask for feedback
If you are not invited to submit a full proposal this time around, please let us know if you would like feedback about your application.
We are looking forward to reading about the great work you all do. Happy grantwriting!
We’re more than three years into our equity journey at Meyer Memorial Trust, and people assume we have it all figured out. We don't.
When I got here in 2002, Meyer was a small organization with all-white leadership and a mostly white board of trustees. Today, I’m lucky to lead a very different organization of nearly 40 employees, half from historically marginalized populations. All but one of our trustees identifies as non-white; our leadership team is mostly women, and more than half of the team are people of color.
“How’d Meyer do it?” our colleagues in philanthropy want to know.
There is no easy answer — a topic for a future blog, perhaps. I’ve learned enough about equity work to know that it is not something you nail down in a few short years. Not by a long shot.
Two and a half years ago, Meyer staffers who were putting the finishing touches on our Equity Statement added a final paragraph that has proven true more times than I can count. We wrote:
As we redouble our effort to make this mission a reality, we expect it will be uncomfortable at times. We do not have all the answers. We will make mistakes. This work is worth it. Our shared future is at stake.
Meyer has gotten a lot of recognition for being one of the larger foundations in our region to commit to using the privilege of our endowment to do something about the inequities at the root of systemic and institutional problems. We have worked consciously as an organization and as individuals to step past good intentions, to take on the sometimes bruising work of fighting bias and oppression — in ourselves, in our communities and in our work.
We promised, in our Equity Statement, to consider the ways “race, ethnicity, national origin, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, class, ability, geography, age and other forms of bias and oppression are embedded within the institutions and systems in our community, within Meyer Trust, and within ourselves.”
Without even realizing it, our equity declaration hurt and angered people and organizations who battle daily against ableism, a form of oppression I knew too little about.
Stephen Marc Beaudoin, executive director of PHAME, a Portland-based nonprofit that focuses on individuals with developmental disabilities, was courageously critical of our terminology and our — frankly, my — ignorance.
“Why, Doug, does [Meyer] deny existence of the word disability?” he asked in an email in April. “This is deeply unsettling to me, and to colleagues in the sector that I speak with.”
Our equity statement is a declaration of our belief that dismantling barriers to equity helps to improve community conditions so that all Oregonians can reach their full potential. The work is essential to accomplish our vision of a flourishing and equitable state. But by using the term “ability,” Stephen said Meyer was ignoring people with disabilities and their contributions.
Listing grantee organizations Meyer has supported, including PHAME, United Cerebral Palsy, NW Down Syndrome Associate, FACT Oregon, Community Vision, Albertina Kerr and Incight, Stephen wrote that “no organizations in Oregon who serve people with disabilities refer to the people we serve as “people with abilities.”
He was right.
I want to own up to this mistake — and to fully acknowledge Meyer's determination to get it right.
While it was true that our program staff avoided the mistake of using “ability” to signify “disability” in grant applications, I personally did not fully understand the difference. Ignorance isn’t a shield, it is a boulder the ignorant must push aside and step beyond.
Stephen’s critique has set me, and Meyer, onto a fresh equity journey.
If you’ve read my occasional blogs, you’ll have heard me discuss how Meyer began studying racial equity in 2012, including the ways racial and structural inequities limit opportunities and hold some Oregonians back. We began delving into equity about LGBTQ issues earlier this year. We continue on both tracks. But until this spring, it had been years since we made disability a focus of conversation at Meyer.
So we began researching the topic. As with the language surrounding race and ethnicity, the language and terminology around disability are constantly evolving. The many equity conversations we engage at Meyer and with our partners make clear how imperative it is to use the correct wording. Intention is imperfect, but we can strive to use words that are less so. Terms may evolve but the need to respectfully use language that includes and supports people who have historically faced disparities is paramount.
Since Stephen brought Meyer’s error to our attention, we have searched through early drafts of the Equity Statement for clues to how we chose the language, since it did not appear in our demographic, grant-related or operations documents.
We researched how others in philanthropy discuss disability, and the language used most often by organizations made up by and representing people with disabilities. We met and spoke with leaders and advocates for people with disabilities in Oregon and across the country to help guide us, including Sharon Waschler, a writer, longtime disability-rights activist and service-dog trainer from rural Western Massachusetts, who has given a lot of thought about terminology around disability.
“I know that the letters ‘a-b-i-l-i-t-y’ are contained in the word ‘disability’, but the etymology of the word and its meaning as a social construct are not the same thing. … Not including ‘disability’ in a direct and clear way usually results in PWDs (people with disabilities) shouldering the onus of awareness and inclusion.”
People with disabilities, whether visible or invisible, shouldn’t have to shoulder the onus of awareness and inclusion. That’s Equity 101.
So Meyer is — and I am — learning.
Even as Meyer begins exploring how bias and oppression impact people with disabilities, others in philanthropy have taken bold moves to focus attention on the culture and study of disability. Our partners at Northwest Health Foundation began comprehensive learning around disability in 2014, with a goal of helping to build the organizational infrastructure of 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) organizations led by persons with disabilities for people with disabilities.
Just this week, Ford Foundation CEO Darren Walker acknowledged making an embarrassing mistake when Ford, the third largest foundation in the country, overhauled its programs to focus on inequality without “meaningfully considering people with disabilities.”
“I am personally privileged in countless ways — not least of which is that I am able-bodied, without immediate family members who have a disability. In my own life, I have not been forced to consider whether or not there were ramps before entering a building, or whether a website could be used by people who were hearing or visually impaired,” Darren blogged on fordfound.org. “In the same way that I have asked my white friends to step outside their own privileged experience to consider the inequalities endured by people of color, I was being held accountable to do the same thing for a group of people I had not fully considered. Moreover, by recognizing my individual privilege and ignorance, I began to more clearly perceive the Ford Foundation’s institutional privilege and ignorance as well.”
His words articulated what I’ve been thinking about since Stephen’s email popped into my inbox.
I have started to pay closer attention to issues and news related to people with disabilities, particularly close to home.
Roughly 747,000 Oregon adults have a disability, a little more than a quarter of the state’s adult population in 2008. Disability becomes increasingly common as people age, from 15 percent of Oregon adults up to age 39, to 47 percent of adults over age 80. And disability often accompanies other disparities, including economic disparities, with about half of people with disabilities in Oregon living on a household income of less than $35,000.
I learned that people with disabilities experience violent victimization at rates three times higher than people without disabilities, and for people with cognitive disabilities, rates are even higher. I’ve discovered that beyond just a term, disability is both a shared social identity and a political status. I’ve gained fresh respect for the concept of People First language. This fall, University of Oregon students for the first time could pursue a Minor or a Graduate Specialization in disability studies as part of their degree programs.
I just finished reading a book by Michael T. Bailey, past president of the National Disability Rights Network as well as Disability Rights Oregon. Here To Stay chronicles our country and our state’s historical failure to recognize that disability is natural, and it catalogs the systematic exclusion and silencing of voices of people with disabilities. Even as a longtime Oregonian, I was not aware of all the deplorable conditions heaped on and encountered by people with disabilities here. I want to be part of changing that arc.
Meyer’s communications style guide was created in an era when the People First movement was gaining steam. Our communications team has updated it to keep our staff and trustees in tune with the language of multiple areas of equity: how we speak about race, ethnicity, gender, sexual identity and class.
Now it reflects our learning around disability, learning we have only just begun.
When Meyer released our much-anticipated 2016 Spring Funding Opportunities a few months ago, we weren’t sure what the interest and response would be.
Afterall, while our mission to advance a flourishing and equitable Oregon remains constant, our focused funding approach on impact, equity and inclusive communities through portfolios is brand new — both for our community partners and for Meyer.
Suffice it to say, the robust response to our funding invitations was beyond what we imagined. All told, we received 675 Inquiry Applications, requesting a total of over $95 million through our Housing Opportunities, Building Community and Healthy Environment portfolios.
Those are sobering numbers. In all, Meyer anticipates distributing approximately $36 million in grant dollars this year, including grants made under our Spring Funding Opportunities, Affordable Housing and Willamette River initiatives, Chalkboard Project, foundation collaborations, legacy programs and upcoming funding opportunities to support leadership development and capacity builders.
On the upside, we are inspired and humbled by the dedication, energy, collaboration and ideas reflected in these applications. We are grateful that Oregon has so many amazing organizations and leaders diligently working to make our state a better, flourishing and equitable place.
At the same time, the response presents a daunting challenge to decide which proposals to move forward to the next step of our process and which to decline at this stage. There is a sizable gap between dollars requested and funds available — the $11 million Meyer allocated for this funding opportunity is dwarfed by the $95 million our partners are asking for. We know these are important decisions for our community and for Meyer. We do not take them lightly.
Over the course of the coming weeks, we will be inviting some applicants to submit full proposals and letting others know that their requests won’t be moving forward. With such a large gap between need and resources, it’s clear that some really good projects won’t be funded because other proposals are simply a stronger match with our goals, including our commitment to advancing equity. There are others that do not appear to quite align with our goals or funding approach or don’t seem quite ripe for a Meyer investment. Regardless of the outcome, we welcome all applicants to contact us for feedback on the decision.
We are truly excited and appreciative that so many organizations are interested in partnering with Meyer to advance equity and inclusion in housing, the environment and Oregon’s communities. Stay tuned, and remember that future opportunities are just around the bend.
A special note for our Building Community applicants: given the volume of applications received in this portfolio (410 inquiries requesting a total of more than $60 million), some decision notifications may extend a few days past our projected 45-day turnaround time. Thanks so much for your continued patience.
